In Re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation

Filing 3930

DECLARATION of Michael A. Walsh in Support re: (364 in 1:07-cv-10470-SAS, 34 in 1:14-cv-01014-SAS, 3927 in 1:00-cv-01898-SAS-DCF) MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.. Document filed by Tauber Oil. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:00-cv-01898-SAS-DCF, 1:07-cv-10470-SAS, 1:14-cv-01014-SAS(Walsh, Michael)

EXHIBIT E

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

In Re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE")
Products Liability Litigation

Master File No.1 :00-1898
MDL 1358 (SAS)

This Document Refers to:
COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, ET AL
V SHELL OIL co. ET AL., NO. 07-1505

DEFENDANT CONOCOPHILLIPS
COMPANY'S OBJECTIONS AND
RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES
AND
REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANTS
REGARDING SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION

Pursuant to Rule 36(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

Defendant

ConocoPhillips Company hereby submits its Objections and Responses to Plaintiffs' First Set Of
Interrogatories and Requests For Production of Documents to Defendants Regarding Supply and
Distribution.

Respectfully submitted,

Stephen C. Dillard
Fulbright & Jaworski, LLP
1301 McKinney, Suite 5100
Houston, Texas 77010-3095
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 713-651-5246
Attorneys for Defendant
ConocoPhillips Company

81413455.1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
On July 1, 2013, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on all counsel of
record via LexisNexis File and Serve, on Plaintiffs' Liaison Counsel via email to
[e-mail] and on Defendants' Liaison Counsel via email 1OmdI1358(a)mwe.com.
The original was filed with the Clerk of Court,

/7~

(

81413455.1

,

-2-

.j

,~na!

Stephen C. Dillard

(e)

Identify the method of delivery (e.g., pipeline, tanker ship, truck) for each of (i)
FUEL containing detectible levels of MTBE, (ii) NEAT MTBE and (iii) FUEL
not containing detectible levels ofMTBE.

RESPONSE: Defendant objects to this interrogatory because it is overly broad in scope and
time period, duplicative, and seeks irrelevant information. Defendant further objects to this
interrogatory because it seeks irrelevant information about "FUEL not containing detectible
levels of MTBE" and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible
evidence. Subject to these objections, Defendant responds: From 1982 until March 2000,
MTBE was blended with some batches of gasoline at Phillips Puerto Rico Core Inc. During that
time, Defendant caused neat MTBE to be delivered by ship to Phillips Puerto Rico Core Inc. for
gasoline blending at the Core facility. Gasoline that did not contain MTBE was also blended at
Phillips Puerto Rico Core Inc. from the late 1960s until June 2000. Defendant did not purchase
gasoline for delivery to or use in Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Defendant refers Plaintiffs to
documents produced in response to Plaintiffs' Fourth Set of Requests for Production nos. 5 and
44 regarding purchases and deliveries ofMTBE.

5.

For the RELEVANT TIME PERIOD, state whether YOU received (i.e., took delivery)
within the RGA each of (i) FUEL containing detectible levels of MTBE, (ii) NEAT
MTBE and (iii) FUEL not containing detectible levels of MTBE. If so, provide the
following for each year of the RELEVANT TIME PERIOD:
(a)

Identify the type and volume in gallons for each of (i) FUEL containing detectible
levels of MTBE, (ii) NEAT MTBE and (iii) FUEL not containing detectible
levels of MTBE;

(b)

Identify the percentage of MTBE present in FUEL containing detectable levels of
MTBE;

(c)

Identify each FACILITY where YOU received each of (i) FUEL containing
detectible levels of MTBE, (ii) NEAT MTBE and (iii) FUEL not containing
detectible levels ofMTBE;

(d)

Identify from and for whom YOU received each of (i) FUEL containing detectible
levels of MTBE, (ii) NEAT MTBE and (iii) FUEL not containing detectible
levels of MTBE; and

(e)

Identify the method of delivery (e.g., pipeline, tanker ship, truck) for each of (i)
FUEL containing detectible levels of MTBE, (ii) NEAT MTBE and (iii) FUEL
not containing detectible levels ofMTBE.

RESPONSE: Defendant objects to this interrogatory because it is overly broad in scope and
time period, duplicative, and seeks irrelevant information. Defendant further objects to this
interrogatory because it seeks irrelevant information about "FUEL not containing detectible
levels of MTBE" and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible
evidence. Subject to these objections, Defendant responds: From 1982 until March 2000,
MTBE was blended with some batches of gasoline at Phillips Puerto Rico Core Inc. During that
81413455.1

-7-